Slashdot Mirror
Film Studios Send Takedown Notices About Takedown Notices
another random user sends this excerpt from the BBC:
"Two film studios have asked Google to take down links to messages sent by them requesting the removal of links connected to film piracy. Google receives 20 million 'takedown' requests, officially known as DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) notices, every month. They are all published online. Recent submissions by Fox and Universal Studios include requests for the removal of previous takedown notices. ... By making the notices available, Google is unintentionally highlighting the location of allegedly pirated material, say some experts. 'It would only take one skilled coder to index the URLs from the DMCA notices in order to create one of the largest pirate search engines available,' wrote Torrent Freak editor Ernesto Van Der Sar on the site."
Again. A pity the first amendment doesn't apply to corporations.
I'm sorry but even the government is getting their hand slapped over secret proceedings (see the recent rulings regarding national security letters), there's no way we're going to allow companies to hide their actions in a civil matter.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
By making the notices available, Google is unintentionally highlighting the location of allegedly pirated material, say some experts.
See, Alanis, *this* is ironic.
Was that a comment or a request for a development project?
(...)
Takedown notices have become so widely applied to every aspect of internet content that they have evolved to become self aware.
the DMCA is becoming t2@(35## NO CARRIER
Good people go to bed earlier.
When you send a demand letter it is property of the recipient. They are free to publish it if they wish. A person receiving a DCMA take doewn notice is under no obligation, and in fact would be stupid to, agree to any confidentiality at all. The recipient is under no obligation to do so.
A more pressing area of legal disclosure is charges against otherwise innocent until proven guilty persons. Prosecutors do perp walks, and public news conferences, all the time despite the legal, and ethical, and moral, land mines.
JJ
Stop sending takedown notices. You're helping the so-called pirates and by the logic you've used in the past that makes you culpable for their piracy.
Now they will send to Slashdot a takedown notice to take down the message about the takedown request they sent to google to take down the list of their takedown requests....
"It's like a million Dancing With The Stars, when all you want is Doctor Who..."
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
It's true, Recursion IS taking over the world, now even idiocy has been made to work in a recursion loop
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
Of pirated material that has been mostly taken down. Right. Because that makes a shitton of sense, and it isn't already easy enough to pirate stuff if you want to anyway. They just don't want to look bad.
If there were actually any proof of that allegation, google would be a whole shitpile of trouble.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
By making the notices available, Google is unintentionally highlighting the location of allegedly pirated material, say some experts.
Ha.."unintentionally"
My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
Unless the takedown notice itself is copyrighted.
Generally speaking you can't copyright legal notices.
Why would you need a skilled coder when the databases are in plain CSV format ?
http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/copyright/data/
By making the notices available, Google is unintentionally highlighting the location of allegedly pirated material, say some experts.
See, Alanis, *this* is ironic.
It's like 10,000 spoons when all you need are a set of ear plugs
Hell, in some places, the laws themselves are copyrighted.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/31/ignorance-of-dcs-copyrighted-laws-can-be-costly/
Some day I'm going to write a page about a "boardwalk game where you manage an empire from your throne" just to see how fast it gets blocked from google search results. Oops, I probably blocked Slashdot just by typing that. The robots who send the notices are amazingly stupid and use leaps of logic that make your average creationist look like an evidence-user.
I'm not saying piracy isn't happening out there, but from what I've seen I bet over 90% of DMCA notices are bogus. If anyone is crawling chilling-effects looking for juicy links to yummy forbidden files, boy are they going to be disappointed. They'll learn that someone's CS101 web crawling assignment has been emailing google about every damn page it finds.
Anyway, since in this case, the content's provenance is systematically known, they can confidently ignore the DMCA notices, as though they virtually received a counter-notice from within their own organization. No need to take anything down. Non-story, other than highlighting how amazingly bad the robots are, and that the special legal obligation created by them, probably ought to be removed or else notice-senders should be held accountable. Congress, do something about that. Can't someone just anonymously slip it into the budget bill?
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Shouldn't those film studios be sending DMCA takedown notices to whatever ISP/etc is actually hosting that content, and not Google, who is not hosting that content?
Code or be coded.
By making the notices available, Google is unintentionally highlighting the location of allegedly pirated material, say some experts. 'It would only take one skilled coder to index the URLs from the DMCA notices in order to create one of the largest pirate search engines available,' wrote Torrent Freak editor Ernesto Van Der Sar on the site."
I stumbled on one of these notices filed by the RIAA yesterday, and it seems not only reasonable but important for the notice to be posted, including the relevant URL; otherwise, how will I know that the site hosting the illegal material is doing so illegally? I looked at the site in question, and they most certainly didn't include any notice that downloading that particular song was a violation of copyright. But because of the notice that Google linked to, I knew that I shouldn't do it.
It seems to me that MPAA and RIAA want to have their cake and eat it, too.
"Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." -- George Orwell
By making the notices available, Google is unintentionally highlighting the location of allegedly pirated material, say some experts.
I thought that was kind of the whole point of the things being posted?
First there was the Streisand (unintentionally calling attention to what you don't want publicized),
then the reverse Streisand (intentionally calling attention by demanding suppression of ostensibly unwanted but actually desired publicity),
and now comes the meta-Streisand (unintentionally calling attention to intentional demands that caused unintentional publicity of what you didn't want publicized.)
Set your phasers on "funky"!
I really is amazing what can't be copyrighted.
Things like databases, lists, recipes, strings of random numbers and letters (activation codes for windows), etc., etc.
When you own the government, you dont have to obey laws.
I think her justification for the title of the song was that none of the examples in it were actually ironic... which in itself is ironic.
Ascalante: Your bride is over 3,000 years old.
Kull: She told me she was 19!
If the studios do drag Google employees to trial for that, they'd probably argue they were Just Following Orders, due to the company mission. Not that the argument would save them, but takedown letters do have information and all...
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
Shouldn't those film studios be sending DMCA takedown notices to whatever ISP/etc is actually hosting that content
Not all countries have a counterpart to the notice and takedown procedure used by the United States.
And what actually is "mega-Streisand"?
Don't you mean mecha-Streisand?
It's not a creative work. It's something they wish to censor. That should be another law or something.
But that's what they believe the DMCA is for. After all, that's how they USE it right? Censoring other peoples' content and the like?
That doesn't make it ironic. It makes it obtuse perhaps. Irony is going further into the deep southern US in the antebellum period to escape slavery. I measure irony based on the Huckfinn test. The actual takedown of takedowns seems ironic but it is really based on different reasons so it isn't.
Yes, unintentionally. In fact, the studios requesting the take down of the take down are the ones who gave up that location. They'd love to be able to say "A file at an undisclosed location is in violation of our copyright, but since we don't want to tell you where, please just block all searches for 'X, Y, and Z.'" But, since they have to actually say where they think it's coming from, they have to give up the position themselves.
You're wrong, ironically.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Does Google, take action before releasing the requests? I guessing this is not for Youtube but search links to 3rd party websites.
The Movie industry does not want it known how active they are at sending take down notices. After all the price we all pay for movies goes up as there effort to do this sort of activity goes up. The 'take down tax'.
There is also the big brother bad guy protecting their profit against the little guy public relations problem. They certainly would like all that take down to happen behind the scenes where no one notices.
They are trying to do some damage control.
I'm just curious if they'll send takedown notices on the takedown notices on the... well, you know. After all, Google may have to append the original notice on the 2nd one so everyone knows what's being referred to...
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
After all, TPB is in trouble for posting the links that people link to copyrighted stuff to download. If linking to the links is wrong because the ones describing those links are contributing to the "piracy problem", then MPAA by describing those links are contributing to the "piracy problem".
People still need to know if THEIR URL is subject to a search engine entry takedown. The only case where the search engine would not need to provide it is if the party doing the takedown ALSO sends the info to the owner of the URL.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
I love the smell of recursion in the morning.
Is that if Google was *able* to buy all these companies (and they can't, they don't have that kind of money, whatever you may think), then they WOULD NOT have to comply with "the law", because they would then own "the law" and could change the laws to whatever benefits them.
You've forgotten that the "laws" in this great nation are written by lobbyists, who work for the 1%. And if Google owns all those firms, they are the biggest 1%'er there is, alpha-dog, owner of all legislation. The government might as well close up shop, if it wasn't for that fact that they need to tax the rest of the 99% into complacency. But that money would still flow to Google then, because they'd change the laws to give themselves massive subsidies.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
See, Alanis, *this* is ironic.
So is calling a song that does not include irony "Ironic".
It was already posted above. A direct link to a Google provided CSV. Can't get any easier than that.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
"Round and round we go..."
There's something here I don't understand.
If the material has been taken down, then the links should not function.
If the links have not been taken down, then the material is (most likely) not infringing.
So the "problem" would appear to be nothing but a fiction.
In this case I think the takedown notices are not for the removal of the pirate websites, but the removal of their URLs from Google's results. If the URLs remain in Google's takedown notice database, and the sites themselves are still up, people can just comb Google's database for pirate links.
That isn't to say that the larger 'problem' of piracy itself is anything but fiction, of course.
Captcha: LAWSUIT
Sorry to destroy your little fantasy, but Google has 60b in short term assets (cash and equivalents):
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bs?s=GOOG+Balance+Sheet&annual
Disney has 39b in stock holders equity:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bs?s=DIS+Balance+Sheet&annual
NBC Universal has 29b in stock holders equity:
http://apps.shareholder.com/sec/viewerContent.aspx?companyid=cmcsa&docid=8075925
So there goes 113% of Google's short-term assets with just those two companies... and they would have to take on 55b in additional liabilities. So they would have 0 cash, no short term assets, and over 75b in liabilities.
In other words.. never going to happen.
I'm pretty sure the takedown notices are supposed to be public record.
They're using their grammar skills there.
Me too! It smells like the smell of recursion in the morning, in the morning.
(Can someone refactor that to make it tail recursive?)
"In this case I think the takedown notices are not for the removal of the pirate websites, but the removal of their URLs from Google's results. If the URLs remain in Google's takedown notice database, and the sites themselves are still up, people can just comb Google's database for pirate links."
I see. I misread OP. I was thinking this was about YouTube (owned by Google), not about Google searches.
From their perspective, people having legitimate access to copies is a problem.
I love the smell of recursion in the morning.
I love the smell of recursion in the smell of recursion.
Ezekiel 23:20
Sounds like they mean they aren't brainy. So are they stupid? Anyway, it reminded me how much I just dislike the sound of "new" words that end in "O". It sounds very not English-like. These words often sound to Latin/Italian to my ears. Can we not stick to more English-based variants of things please? Does Brainynot not get the job done just as well... letting you get the message across that you are a dumb business?
So anyway but yeah... I do like the sound of this product's potential! ;)
I was hoping someone would point that out. 'cause you know when they made that decision, they were snickering about it.
If I had mod points (and hadn't already posted in this thread) I would be giving you one.
They've figured it out. At least they still don't know that outubeyay is the new aspternay.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Fox and Universal!
THINK! It's patriotic
If it were copyrighted, then by default Google would need a license to read the notice. Which would have to be agreed to by Google and Google would have to have the right to refuse, else it is not a binding agreement.
Somebody +1 this insightful fast!
THINK! It's patriotic
The takedown notices, and the concept of potentially fetching all of them and using them to pirate stuff, is a non-issue. I just tried to do exactly that. chillingeffects.org will block your ip after you request 500 contiguous notices. If you want to get all 500k of them, you'd need to use 1000 different ip addresses. That isn't really that hard, but not exactly trivial, nor legal. Who here has legal access to 1000 different ip addresses? Another idea would be to fetch them from the google cache. Google cache bans your ip if you request about 50 different urls from it, for a temporary amount of time. Good luck getting them all from the google cache.